On the surface it is not the stated intent of the page to call for heinous vigilantes to take out cyclists and so forth. It is just that any comment vaguely critical of cycling attracts them. This is regardless of the intent of the person starting the page.

Everything get hijacked by tools on the internet.

Not worth it Womble. It won't make your life any better even if FB did act on it.

The page wasn't started with the intent of inciting violence against cyclists, but after talking with the pages creator who claims to have been skittled by a cyclist recently, he is keen on leaving the offending comments up. I this needn't concern me Colin I don't know what should tbh.

I've already reported it, as much as i doubt fb will do anything, at least i have done something. It is not ok for people to say 'we should run over all the *expletive', in my book that is threatening a group with murder, and if it isn't already a crime, it bloody well should be. The person who started the page can say that they aren't against cyclists but that counts for zero if they do not remove such comments. To remain silent is to consent.

When man invented the bicycle he reached the peak of his attainments- Elizabeth West.

I believe quite strongly in free speech up to the point of directly inciting hate or directly inciting violence towards others. The premise of that facebook page is not doing that. The presence of offensive comments there is no different from those found on TheAge/SMH by users.

As such I strongly believe the site should be allowed to exist. The Facebook page owning is expressing his opinion on government infrastructure decisions in Sydney. I would be repulsed to live in a country that repressed such expression.

If any PARTICULAR posts incite hate or violence then by all means report them. But honestly I think it would be better spending your time elsewhere.

ldrcycles wrote:I've already reported it, as much as i doubt fb will do anything, at least i have done something. It is not ok for people to say 'we should run over all the *expletive', in my book that is threatening a group with murder, and if it isn't already a crime, it bloody well should be. The person who started the page can say that they aren't against cyclists but that counts for zero if they do not remove such comments. To remain silent is to consent.

I'm sorry but that is BS. If you start holding communication facilitators responsible for the content that that is expressed then where does it stop? It is attitudes like that which cause forums and other such communication mediums to be overzealous in moderation and thus what happens to free speech?

For example is BNA forums consenting and encouraging the breaking of laws by allowing comments on their forums concerning illegal behaviour such as riding without a bell or riding without a helmet?